Having regard to the term of service of the petitioners, they had qualifying service, making them eligible for pension as per the Pension Rules. Petitioners are thus not entitled to claim the condonation of the interruption in their services to enhance their pension.
HC held that we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition and the same is accordingly dismissed without going into the merit of the assessment only on the ground of availability of the alternative remedy. This writ petition is dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- upon Mr. Somak Basu, learned Advocate because of his rude behavior in Court and addressing to the chair in highly disrespectful manner.
Chennuboina Raj Kumar Vs State of Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh HC) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is only customer who visited the said brothel house for prostitution on payment made to other accused and as per the settled law in this regard, customer is not liable for prosecution for any of […]
Micro Focus Software Solutions India Private Limited Vs Union of India & Anr. (Delhi High Court) Reply to GST Registration cancellation notice was filed by the petitioner, stating why its registration should not be cancelled. Ignoring the reasons stated the GST Registration certificate was cancelled. Inspection of the premises was carried out by the Authority, […]
PCIT Vs Universal Music India Pvt. Ltd. (Bombay High Court) Notice under Section 263 was issued by CIT on two issues, namely, (a) disallowance of Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) paid of Rs.10,72,532/- included in miscellaneous expenses and not allowed by the Assessing Officer and (b) provision of Rs.1,40,98,685/- in respect of slow moving and absolete […]
Ashoka Buildcon Ltd. Vs Union of India (Bombay High Court) HC held that Petitioners are allowed to file and correct TRAN-1 and TRAN-2 Form. In case it is not possible to file the same online, it shall be filed manually. FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT 1 In all these matters, the […]
HC direct the respondents to maintain judicial discipline and follow the doctrine of binding precedent and be careful in future, having due regard to the authorities of the Court, keeping in mind the judicial propriety and discipline.
Lokhandwala Construction Industries Private Limited Vs DCIT (Bombay High Court) Once a query is raised during assessment proceedings and assessee has replied to it, it follows that the query raised was a subject matter of consideration of the Assessing Officer while completing the assessment. It is not necessary that an assessment order should contain reference […]
Tvl. Asian Paints Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Madras High Court) This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent herein to accept the bank guarantee equivalent to the disputed penalty amount of Rs.25,86,662/- in accordance with the provisions of Section 129(1)(c) of the CGST Act, […]
PCIT Vs Power Links Transmission Ltd. (Delhi High Court) Undoubtedly, the principles of res-judicata and estoppel are not applicable in taxation matters. However, it has been held that a departure from a finding during the past years would result in a contradictory finding. (See: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sridev Enterprises (1991) 192 ITR 165). […]
